Scanning question

[Mixalis]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

After over ten years playing with digital, including the latest Monochrom, I have dusted off my MP and run a few rolls with good results. However, I am not too happy with the quality of the "high quality" scans from the developing house and am wondering if I could do better with my own equipment. I've scoured the web and concluded that the Epson Perfection V750 flatbed scanner is probably what I should aim for. However, it is a big investment and I would be interested if other forum members have experience. I have absolutely no experience of scanning negatives but I would hope that the process would be straightforward and the results superb. I also plan to use the machine for scanning routine snaps and negs from decades ago, mainly as a matter or record rather than for any higher intent. Any comments would be appreciated.

[250swb]

There are other very recent threads that cover a similar topic, but unless you need something that can scan more than 35mm, like MF or LF, a Plustek scanner is a better, and cheaper, starting point than an Epson V700/750. The Plustek (it comes in many forms, but the scanner is the essentially is the same, just software differences) is a dedicated 35mm scanner and the Epson only really comes into its own for medium format and larger. The Epson is also good for digital contact sheets. But at 35mm it is really in the realms of average quality scans rather than very good quality scans.

 

With a Plustek you should be able to get what you want, but scanning is another art to master to make it happen, and there are many things to understand. Even the software you use can make the difference. So whichever you choose it isn't an easy introduction. Just don't go scanning an archive of negatives before you are well versed, otherwise you just have to do it all over again. But if you are having your film processed outside, get a low res scan done for your digital contact sheet, and just use the scanner for high quality scans and it should be the best of both worlds.

 

Steve

[Mixalis]

Thanks, Steve. It's always good to have a reason not to spend money. I will research the options you suggest.

[topoxforddoc]

Mike,

 

If you want high quality scans for 35mm only and are happy to buy used, have a look at a Minolta Scan Elite 5400 (original or mark II) or a Nikon Coolscan L-40 or L-50. Hook either option up to a copy of Vuescan and they will work on Mac or Windoze. Cheaper alternatives include the Minolta Scan Dual III or IV.

 

Charlie

[philipus]

It's taken me quite a few years to get acceptable at scanning. Initially, some ten years ago when I began with my Coolscan V, I had some really disappointing experiences. But don't let this put you off. Ask questions and those who have gone through the learning curve will be happy to help.

 

As for scanning an old archive, make sure you ask before you begin that task. Considerations and decisions made at the outset will be important both in order to simplify the workflow as much as possible and to get the quality you want.

 

Good luck

Philip

[Doc Henry]

Mike, Steve and me and with other participants of LUF, we have this thread,

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/film-forum/160651-epson-v700-750-very-good-our.html

if this can help you.

Develop your self b&w film, good work and freedom (no scratches on the gelatin)

After 4 years of digital M9 and M8 (which I always keep ) I return to film (no pictures

with edges impeccably smooth)

See this thread , and you are welcome Mike

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/other/286747-i-like-film-open-thread.html

Good luck

Regards

Henry

[Mixalis]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Philp & Henry:

 

Thanks for the useful suggestions. I am not about to rush into things and, to be truthful, my MP has been gathering dust since I got the MM. But I will have to return to this, especially to the archival question, and I am grateful for your input and offer of help.

 

Mike

[philipus]

Mike, btw, if you have a DSLR you could also consider digitizing the images. The extra equipment you'd need for such a setup would likely be less than a dedicated scanner (in fact, for archiving purposes you might even be satisfied with the quality from a digital compact and a light table, all depending on what you require of course).

 

Cheers

Philip

[Mixalis]

Thanks, that's another option I hadn't considered. I don't have a DSLR but that's easily overcome. I will investigate.

 

Mike

[earleygallery]

I have the Epson (older model) and have been happy with the quality of scans, certainly up to A4 size prints they look fine to me. I've even made some A3 prints from old slides and they were fine too!

 

For most purposes I don't think you'll be disappointed in the Epson, but the other options mentioned are all worth considering.

[Mixalis]

Thanks, that's encouraging and all this information has given me a lot to think about.

[james.liam]

My 2 cents; having a flatbed like the V750 does allow you to do contact sheets, in addition to digitizing MF and prints, of course. I recently bought the scanner in the US for the equivalent of £525 since the price has fallen. The issue with the Minolta Dimage 5400 v.1 is that if you're using the latest OS and USB ports of newer vintage, there can arise issues with data transfer as the speed of this old machine can't keep up. I encountered this issue with one I briefly had; the Minolta software wasn't supported and VueScan didn't help either. Mine banded furiously across every slide scanned. I have to get a hold of an older computer to see it it makes a difference.

 

The Plusteks have they're own limitations and the actual optical resolution isn't fantastic, though the new (pricey) 120 scanner, delayed because of production issues, holds promise with a significant increase in resolution.

 

I also bought some ANR glass to lay down into the transparency trays of the V750 and will soon see if the Epson can acquit itself at all.

[tobey bilek]

Sadly affordable medium high quality scanners are gone.

 

A nice Dimage 5400 is good , but like buying a used lightbulb or used car with no odometer.

 

Film is for darkroom, digi camera is for computer. Accept it.

[philipus]

I generally don't mind speaking in absolutes, but I would phrase it differently: imo, film is for both darkroom and computer. Digital is only for computer

[Doc Henry]

I generally don't mind speaking in absolutes, but I would phrase it differently: imo, film is for both darkroom and computer. Digital is only for computer

..... and I would add that the color film (3 layers of silver grain Red® ,Green(G) and Blue() converted to b&w (ex by SE) is prettier, more depth, less "synthetic image" (edges "impeccably smooth") ,short more relief

than the images from the M Monochrome (sensor with one layer of silicium with 3 filters R(2 filters) ,G(1),B(1)) . See post numbers 351 and 352 of this thread :

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/other/286747-i-like-film-open-thread-18.html

Best

Henry

[becker]

I use an LS 40 / Nikon Coolscan, its totally okay for me cs4 in the post proc

works well. The Vuescan Software is very good.

I changed, gave the Guy an Epson 750 for his LS 40.

The automatic Film feeder for stripes with 6 pics is good, as far as I know

an alonstanding feature ?

 

In all it takes a lot of time, if You have a big archive to work on its no fun

[rpopescu]

Film is for darkroom, digi camera is for computer. Accept it.

 

Now that's just not useful.

 

 

I'll throw in a vote for the Epson V7xx series of scanners. I find the 35mm scanning capabilities good, as in I am pleased with the results after sharpening in post-processing.

The 120 film results are very good, imo.

 

Tri-X is a pain in the neck to scan because I find it curls longitudinally, thus the film plane isn't parallel to the scanner.

Anti-newton ring (ANR) glass inserts help with that - if I'm not mistaken I've been advised about them by Steve - you can find these at BetterScanning; I'm about to order mine.

I don't have these kinds of issues with other films I use (HP5+, APX100, Delta3200, color stuff).

[Mixalis]

FWIW, Aperture in London have a new in-house developing service which claims a one-day turnaround. They offer scan to disk and I asked them about quality. They can do a more detailed scan for a further £3 per roll. From memory I think they charge £8 for normal develop and scan to disk (no prints). I am planning to take in a roll when I get back to the UK and I will see if the higher resolution scans are worthwhile.

 

Mike

[sblitz]

that's really cheap. in NYC it costs me about $35 to get a 36exp roll developed and scanned. i get a tiff file back, around 35mb. was going to another spot, they gave me a jpeg around 20mb. what i can about both, esp the tiff file, is that once i have in LR or C1 there is a surprising amount of latitude and information to be pulled from the highlights and shadows. in addition, when i print on my epson r2880 there is discernible difference between these digitized film files and straight digital from my m9 -- not always obvious on the screen. the film files, although digitized, has more dimensionality and softness in tone gradations. esp when i print letter size or larger. given that i have a day job i am happy to pay the price to spend my time with the file and printing it rather than getting it into the computer.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Mixalis]

sblitz: I have been paying £10 for develop and scan (no prints) through my nearest Leica dealer. It takes up to two weeks. The new deal from Aperture seems to be better value and I will transfer my allegiance until I find out differently!